Martin Shkreli was convicted of fraud, but price gouging is more what he is known for in the realm of public opinion.
What we are to infer from the Shkreli case is that buying patents and gouging the public is an acceptable practice not to be deterred.
A patent is a legal monopoly by operation of the law. It is protected by government authority, which is supposed to operate in the public interest in priority.
We are to naturally infer that since a patent is private property, and people can use their property to Shkreli other people all they want, the public good is to Shkreli.
What is not in the public interest, we must infer, is any act to defraud people who invest to Shkreli other people — doing the harm to derive the good.
Doing the harm to do the good, as nihilists contend, is only natural, isn’t it? It “just happens” by default, doesn’t it?
(See articles by griffithlighton on ECV-symmetry.)